I've read through the rules articles here and on BGG, and I don't think this has been answered. What has been answered is that you can build two mosaics in either order and claim multiple sanctuaries after you build, even if one of the tiles you built could have ruined your sanctuary.

But, what if you can afford to build two mosaics, two mosaics are in the stack that can be built, BUT if you build either of the top two mosaics, the other one will not fit?

So what happens?
1. Are you simply not allowed to build two mosaics?
2. Is the second mosaic you bought disqualified and so you toss mosaics so the second you buy is the last listed below?

If 2, can you, as usual, choose which of the top two mosaics to place and use the second one to invalidate the first one (which gives you a size two sanctuary instead of a size one sanctuary)?

Here's how this can happen. Here's the open space on the board:
XXXXXXXXX
XXX

The reason we discussed placing mosaics in any order was related to this very question. You buy mosaics in order from top to bottom. If you buy more than one mosaic on one turn, you may place them in any order. If placing one now causes the second to not be able to played, that piece would then be discarded, but the resources used to purchase it would not be returned.

The question is: why do you ask? What is your intent here? Because this can be treated one of two ways. 1) You knew the situation would be caused (as you are able to inspect the pile of mosaics as long as they remain in order) and knew that only one of the two could fit. But you decided to purchase them anyway. Perhaps the 2nd piece in the pile was more desirable

2) You didn't know that would happen. But in this case, you probably should purchase a single piece only, place it, and then allow for the automatic check and discard of useless pieces. Then you may continue purchasing pieces to see if something else would fit.

So in the first example, it is deliberate and allowed. You are paying "extra" since you are buying a worthless piece but getting the one you want now.

In the second example, you can avoid wasting resources and let the game clear out the "trash" for you before you conitnue with your turn.

*I* ask because I'm a game group organizer and I teach Cleo often. *My* intent is to get an official answer. A player would consider the matter with his intent of optimizing his yield for the cards played.

If I were writing the rules, I'd say you buy and place tiles one at a time, and place statue(s) at the end of building. This would require the first mosaic in the stack to be used, but immediately invalidate the rest of the mosaics except the last, which could be built and played and would yield a 1-size sanctuary. However, this is contradicted by previous rulings that mosaics can be built in any order.

If a mosaic can be invalidated (and disappears) after buying, that produces a limited Scribe effect for "free", allowing the second mosaic to be built, invalidating the first, and gaining a sanctuary space in my example.

If the mosaic that can't be built must be discarded from hand, that's unprecedented in the rules.

If a legally placeable mosaic cannot be bought, that also has no precedent. It introduces an unprecedented time context into the game: Even though two mosaics could be built with the Scribe a player cannot build both without the Scribe.

Perhaps I should note that I created the particular example above for ease of typing with Xs. Far more significant cases could occur.

Hopefully you are not getting defensive - as my question wasn't accusatory but trying to come at it from your angle (its hard to tell and that can happen when just typing words).

A) Thre rules state that you build and buy all in step 2 of the Quarry option. You may buy as many pieces as you want in as many different categories as you want. (outline on page 4)

B) The rules also specifically state that when you place a mosaic tile, you must immediately check the top of the pile and discard anything that can no longer fit. (inset on page 9)

C) DOW has clarified that you may also buy multiuple mosaic pieces and place them in any order that you want. (post by Eric)

To me, that says you can officially do 1 of two things when it comes to buying mosaics:

1) Follow the official rule "B" above. Purchase 1 piece and place it. Allow the game to discard the next piece(s) that cannot fit. Then purchase a 2nd piece if you want.

2) Buy as many pieces as you want of the mosaic per official rule "A" above and then place them in any order that you want per official clarification "C"

By doing "1" you are not wasting any resources as you are allowing the game to clear the piece out. By doing "2" you are deliberately paying to get past a piece that you don't want in order to use a piece lower in the pile. If the other piece(s) can't be fit, then they are discarded like all the other mosaic pieces that can't be placed.

This doesn't diminish the value of the Scribe. 1) The Scribe lets you get to any piece wherever it may be in the pile without having to first go through and buy all the other pieces. 2) The scribe still has an other option of use in the game. So you have to weigh the costs of using the Scribe (get any piece you want plus 2 corruption) or buy as many pieces as necessary (at 5 resources per mosaic!).

Based on what we have through the rules and clarifications by DOW, I am not sure that anything else needs ot be explained. I see the rulings as answering your example. But maybe I am still not understanding what you see as a significant difference.

1) Follow the official rule "B" above. Purchase 1 piece and place it. Allow the game to discard the next piece(s) that cannot fit. Then purchase a 2nd piece if you want.

2) Buy as many pieces as you want of the mosaic per official rule "A" above and then place them in any order that you want per official clarification "C"

The problems somewhat arise because building is considered by the rules and rulings to be an indivisible action: You do all your buying, do all your building, place you statues, score, and only then (for instance) check for end of game.

Your 2 is clearly legal per previous rulings, but the question of what happens with the second piece which becomes unplayable in hand during the indivisible building turn is open.

Your 1 is not clearly legal. If building is indivisible, then discarding mosaics should only happen after mosaic(s) are built, at the end of the build.

Your B ties to the rule which says, "Each time one (or more) Mosaic piece(s) are built..." so if building is indivisible, then this check is made only at the end of building. If building were divisible, you would make the check after each mosaic, and it would not be possible to build "(or more)" mosaics. Therefore, I'm forced to conclude building is indivisible, which leads to the other problems.

So the significant difference is that if building is indivisible, as established by the rules and previous rulings, what happens when a playable mosaic becomes unplayable in hand? This has not been asked before that I have been able to find.

The problems somewhat arise because building is considered by the rules and rulings to be an indivisible action: You do all your buying, do all your building, place you statues, score, and only then (for instance) check for end of game.

Ah. Therein lies your problem. Building and buying are all part of the same phase and are not strictly outlined as you have stated. You may buy, build, buy, build, etc. -or- buy, buy, build, build, etc. You are being more restrictive in your interpretation than the rules are.

Quote:

Your 2 is clearly legal per previous rulings, but the question of what happens with the second piece which becomes unplayable in hand during the indivisible building turn is open.

If you purchased a piece and it cannot fit, what are you supposed to do with it? It was legal to purchase it. There is precendent in discarding pieces that don't fit.

Quote:

Your 1 is not clearly legal. If building is indivisible, then discarding mosaics should only happen after mosaic(s) are built, at the end of the build.

Again, there is no "build phase" - it is all jumbled together with buying as well. You may build multiple times during step 2. The rules seem quite clear that this check is immediate and intra-phase.

Quote:

Your B ties to the rule which says, "Each time one (or more) Mosaic piece(s) are built..." so if building is indivisible, then this check is made only at the end of building. If building were divisible, you would make the check after each mosaic, and it would not be possible to build "(or more)" mosaics. Therefore, I'm forced to conclude building is indivisible, which leads to the other problems.

You do make the check after each one was built. So you can buy Piece A, Buy Piece B, Place Piece B, check the remaining mosaics, Place Piece A, check the remaining mosaics. If Piece A doesn't work now that Piece B is placed, it gets tossed like the others would. It just now cost you 10 resources to get 1 piece of mosaic down.

Quote:

So the significant difference is that if building is indivisible, as established by the rules and previous rulings, what happens when a playable mosaic becomes unplayable in hand? This has not been asked before that I have been able to find.

No one said the building is indivisible. So I guess all logic preceeding from that can't be verified until DOW gets back into town.

You are right. I became so fixated on step 2 and beyond I failed to realize step 1 was distinct from step 2.

However, I don't think this changes anything. You are still allowed to build in any order (step 2). After each time you build a mosaic, you still check right then and there to see if other pieces can get discarded. Then continue buying.

You have already purchased everything legally in step 1 (so I think this separation actually strengthens my argument) and now you are "stuck" with it in Step 2. You can place them in any order as we both agree on that. So if the 2nd piece doesn't fit, it doesn't fit. You can't place it; you can't return it; you didn't do anything wrong by buying it. So what's left? Discard it.

What is the point of buying mulitple mosaics and placing them in any order? It is to manipulate that feature to the best of your ability. If that includes forcing a discard, I think it is within the realm of the rulings and the spirit of the game.

I think DOW said they would be back this weekend (I thought February 3rd was their return date). But you may need to bring this up. They don't typically get involved in the game forums unless it is a top 25 game.

I think DOW said they would be back this weekend (I thought February 3rd was their return date). But you may need to bring this up. They don't typically get involved in the game forums unless it is a top 25 game.

I emailed Eric a couple days ago and let him know this thread had some activity in their absence and need some attention. He said he was in Germany for the Nuremburg Fair and would take a look when he got back.

The player can place the first mosaic so that: (1) the second mosaic is valid, and can be played, leaving a spot to allow the XXXXX mosaic and no sanctuary; (2) the second mosaic is invalid and but the third is valid, giving 1 and 4 sanctuaries; or (3) a 4 sanctuary is created and only the XXXXX mosaic can be played.

This makes me think the ruling on this should be:
1) You may only buy mosaics that all can be played in some way.
2) Having bought the mosaics, you cannot change the orientation on one to invalidate another mosaic you bought.
3) Elimination of unplayable mosaics happens only after your building.

This makes me think the ruling on this should be:
1) You may only buy mosaics that all can be played in some way.
2) Having bought the mosaics, you cannot change the orientation on one to invalidate another mosaic you bought.
3) Elimination of unplayable mosaics happens only after your building.

Comments? Official rulings?

1) This is contrary to the rules. I still think it is a valid strategy to buy something you can't use to get to something you can use but can't risk delaying the purchase to a later round.

2) Why limit yourself in this way? The order and orientation they come up in the pile should have no bearing on how you place them on the board. You should have the freedom to place the pieces to maximize your goals. Why dictate this down to a rules level.

3) OK. I am not sure of the point of this one without the other two rules.

If you feel this is how it shoudl be played and will make the game more enjoyable, then go for it. Doesn't look like DOW is interested in resolving it anytime soon.

Recall that the sequence is (1) buy (buy everything you're going to buy) then (2) place what you bought. Placing is not voluntary, so you couldn't buy a mosaic to place and a mosaic to throw away to keep it from invalidating a sanctuary. This isn't specifically prohibited, but page 4, step 2 says you must place what you buy. Otherwise, you could do things like buy a wall and a sphinx and throw them away, preventing their completion, and preventing the end of the game (which might be considered better than losing). So, I think (2) requires placement.

On rereading the rules yet again, my 3 isn't quite right: the rules say you check the top mosaic for playability, not that you search the stack. This is at the end of the "Building a Sanctuary" box on page 9. As a result, opportunities for multiple building of mosaics is less toward the end of the game.

Why would you buy a sphinx and not place it? That isn't an option under the rules.

But buying multiple mosaics is and it has been clarified you can buy multiples and place them in any order you want. And if placing one prevents the placement of another piece then it gets tossed. I am not saying buy a mosaic and toss it if you don't feel like placing it. I am saying buy more than you need so you can place them in such a way to prevent the placement of others.

I think that is what DOW is trying to get across here. If you don't like it, just houserule it.

Why would you buy a sphinx and not place it? That isn't an option under the rules.

The same rule--page 4, rule 2--applies to all placing, so it should apply to mosaics. I'm just saying, the rule should apply uniformly: either placement is required or optional.

The reason one would not place is so that one doesn't lose. Suppose you've taken a lot of corruption and gotten shut out of sanctuaries. Your only option to being croc food is to cause the game to never reach end conditions, converting a sure loss to a tie.

Placement isn't optional unless the piece doesn't fit. All pieces int eh game have a specific place - except mosaics. So they are treated differently.

We have gotten clarfication from DOW that you can buy as many as you want and place in any order. For most of us and in most situations, that has been enough. You want further clarification but DOW doesn't seem to be listening. So my suggestion continues to be to play it how you want.

But to shoehorn mosaics to fit with the mechanics does not seem right to me in light of what has been stated. And to try to other pieces follow mosaic tiles is not right either. You can't purposesly ditch a wall so you can prevent that section from being completed and prevent he game end. (Likewise, you can't discard a mosaic piece that can legally fit because you want a larger sanctuary - but you can alter the placement to make the legal placement illegal).

...You can't purposesly ditch a wall so you can prevent that section from being completed and prevent he game end. (Likewise, you can't discard a mosaic piece that can legally fit because you want a larger sanctuary - but you can alter the placement to make the legal placement illegal).

I think we're pretty much saying the same thing, but that you only check the top mosaic for legality changes things just a bit, I think, since only the top mosaic is guaranteed to be placeable, and the removal of an unplaceable mosaic happens after the build. So this presents a few odd cases.

1. The second and third mosaics are placeable: You can't buy the top two mosaics, place the first so the second is now illegal, discard the second and grab the third for free--grabbing the third mosaic in the placement step violates the turn order, and grants a free limited ability to not play just the top mosaics.

2. Same case: Can you buy all three, render the second illegal and toss it paid for but not scored and place the third. I tend to think you can do this. This is parallel to mistakenly buying a second mosaic thinking it will fit when it won't: the mosaic gets dumped and you don't score. I don't see the answer to this even implied by the rules, but this seems so expensive that it's not unbalancing--the rules don't prohibit it.

3. The second mosaic can't be placed and the third can. You can't buy two, dump the second, and take the third without having bought it in the buying step. Again, this violates the turn order and that discards of unplayable, top-of-stack mosaics happens only after building is completed, and grants a free limited ability to not play just the top mosaics.

4. Same case, but you pay for all three. Again, the rules don't say you can't buy a mosaic that can't be placed, so this seems to be legal. Of course, you only score mosaics that get placed.

Certainly mosaics are different since they're the only things where one placement can affect the next (aside from the trivial example of sphinxes), but they don't have any special placement rules that deal with this issues, so we have to apply the standard rules as well as we can.

1. The second and third mosaics are placeable: You can't buy the top two mosaics, place the first so the second is now illegal, discard the second and grab the third for free--grabbing the third mosaic in the placement step violates the turn order, and grants a free limited ability to not play just the top mosaics.

Agreed to a certain extent. You can't discard and get a "free" mosaic. But what you could do is spend the resources to get the top 3. Then Place #1 to make it so that you can't Place #2, and then Place #3. No refunds on #2. This is what I keep saying that it may be worthwhile to "waste" the resources to buy #2 so you can get to #3 on the same turn.

Quote:

2. Same case: Can you buy all three, render the second illegal and toss it paid for but not scored and place the third. I tend to think you can do this. This is parallel to mistakenly buying a second mosaic thinking it will fit when it won't: the mosaic gets dumped and you don't score. I don't see the answer to this even implied by the rules, but this seems so expensive that it's not unbalancing--the rules don't prohibit it.

OK, I am answering as I read so yes, we are on the same page here. The rules don't say that you can or cannot do this. But the repsonses from DOW imply that you can. This is what we were hoping DOW to clarify, correct? I lost track of where we were on this whole thing to be honest!!!

Quote:

3. The second mosaic can't be placed and the third can. You can't buy two, dump the second, and take the third without having bought it in the buying step. Again, this violates the turn order and that discards of unplayable, top-of-stack mosaics happens only after building is completed, and grants a free limited ability to not play just the top mosaics.

Right, I tend to agree with you on this one. However, I think you also have the option to buy one mosaic, place it, check the top of the pile, and then buy another one. This option is spelled out in the rules and allows for people to not waste their money.

Also remember that buying and placing all take place during the same step so there is no restriction that you must buy everything first and then place or buy-place, buy-place.

Quote:

4. Same case, but you pay for all three. Again, the rules don't say you can't buy a mosaic that can't be placed, so this seems to be legal. Of course, you only score mosaics that get placed.

Yes we agree here.

Quote:

Certainly mosaics are different since they're the only things where one placement can affect the next (aside from the trivial example of sphinxes), but they don't have any special placement rules that deal with this issues, so we have to apply the standard rules as well as we can.

Yes, but we also have the clarifications that opened up the interpretation more than the rules. So we also need to take those comments as well and apply them.

I think our major difference is that you are tending to be more conservative and still try to rectify everything to the rules while I am being more liberal and saying in light of the revised internet comments, that we are granted more freedom in the purchasing and placing of mosaics.

3. The second mosaic can't be placed and the third can. You can't buy two, dump the second, and take the third without having bought it in the buying step. Again, this violates the turn order and that discards of unplayable, top-of-stack mosaics happens only after building is completed, and grants a free limited ability to not play just the top mosaics.

Right, I tend to agree with you on this one. However, I think you also have the option to buy one mosaic, place it, check the top of the pile, and then buy another one. This option is spelled out in the rules and allows for people to not waste their money.

Technically, you do steps 1-5 on page 4 once for all pieces, then check to see if the top mosaic is not placeable. (Otherwise, you'd roll the dice for each piece.) As a practical matter, I have no problem with people working out things one step at a time. However, the effect, I think, has to be as if you bought all you were going to buy, placed everything, and so forth. You can't buy one mosaic, discard another as unplayable for free, and buy the third.

Step 2 is all of your buying and placing at once. You do this before you move to step 3 collecting income. So you are only going to roll the dice one time (Step 5) no matter how many pieces you buy.

The rules then go on and say this:

Quote:

Each time one (or more) Mosaic piece(s) are built, you
must verify whether the next Mosaic piece now on top of
the pile in the Quarry can still be built in the spaces now
left in the Palace's Garden. If not, the piece must
immediately be removed from the pile, and set aside for
the rest of the game. The next piece newly revealed must
then be checked, (and removed if it cannot be built),
etc... If the pile of Mosaic pieces is thus emptied, move
Cleopatra one space forward as indicated in step 4 of
the &#8220;Visit the Quarry&#8221; section on p 4.

I think the key is, "Each time one (or more) Mosaic piece(s) are built..." You buy them in step 1 on page 4, you place them in step 2. You can't repeat the steps since you go through the whole series of 5 steps to build: if you repeated the steps, you would roll the dice multiple times. You get to visit the quarry once, buy pieces once, place them once and on until you roll the dice once.

I think the quarry rules are pretty clear about going though the five steps once. The rule you quote is a special case for discarding unusable top mosaics, not permission to repeat steps in the quarry sequence. Remember that there's a card to give you the power to go into the mosaic pile. If you can repeat the rule sequence, much of the usefulness of the card goes away in the end game.

This isn't how I've been playing, but having reread the rules again, I think that's what they require. It may not be the designer's intention, but we don't know that until he tells us.

PS: Notice that the rules only want the top mosaics checked. This implies that it was part of the designer's intent that the second mosaic block attempts to play multiple mosaics as things get tight. This blockage prevents one player from grabbing all the sanctuary spots he needs in one play, in that part of the game, which I've seen happen with tossing unplayable mosaics out without regard to the building sequence. So, I think not being able to discard unplayable mosaics mid-build is an intentional part of the rules; if it wasn't, the rules would have you discard all unplayable mosaics or discard unplayable mosaics whenever they are detected. The rules are apparently worded to allow blockages in the ability to play multiple mosaics, and this appears to have a beneficial effect on balance.

We check each piece for playability when purchasing... once all are purchased, then we play them in any order, with place, check remaining in-hand for playability, place next, etc, discarding any that are no longer playable. Then we check the topmost for still being playable, since if the rest are not, it closes out mosaics.

SO, a guide to how we play it in my group.

a.0) purchase top-most, putting in hand.
a.1) check next for playability as the board sits.
a.2) repeat a.0 and a.1 as resource cards permit
a.3) take any corruption which may be needed
b.0) pick one in hand to be played.
b.1) place that one in a legal manner.
b.2) see if a sanctuary is formed.
b.3) if sanctuary formed, place Anubis if desired.
b.4) score piece*
b.5) check remaining pieces in hand for playability; any no longer playable are discarded.
b.6) if any remain in hand, go back to b.0, else go to c.0)
c.0) check topmost mosaic for playability. if not, discard and repeat.
c.1) If no tiles remain on stack, mosaics closed.
d) apply total scored points from b.4

That's approximately how I used to play. However, in re-reading the rules to try to answer my question about whether the building player could place to disqualify mosaics he wanted to buy in the same turn, I ran into the quarry step list on page 4 and the mosaic box on page 9, especially the last paragraph, which is clear about only checking the top mosaic.

So, I now believe the designer-intended sequence is:
1. Pay for everything you want to build.
2. Take all the pieces and place them. "Each time one (or more) Mosaic piece(s) are built", the top mosaic is checked, per page 9. The top mosaic only: though if one is removed, the new top mosaic is checked--rinse and repeat.
3. Collect talents.
4. Move Cleo if needed.
5. Roll.

Of course, this order can be relaxed for ease of play, but I will no longer pitch a mosaic except after all building is finished, and I will only check the top mosaic. I think this will improve especially the five player game, where one player often gets little sanctuary space.